ON HUMAN LIBERTY

To the Fatriarchs, Friviates, Archbishops and BisJiops of the

Çatholic World, in favor and communion with

the Apostolic See.

POPE I.EO XIII

Vénérable Brethren,

Health and Apostolic Bénédiction.

Liberty, the highest gift of nature, which belongs only to intellectual or rational beings, confers on man this dignity, that he is " in the hand of his counsel " and has power over his actions. But the manner in which this dignity is borne is of the greatest moment, inasmuch as on the use that is made of liberty the highest good and the greatest evil alike dépend. Man indeed is Iree to obey his reason, to seek moral good, and to strive after his last end. Yet he is free also to turn aside to ail other things, to follow after false dreams of hapiness, to disturb established order, and to fall headlong into the destruction which he has voluntarily chosen; The Redeemer of mankind, Jésus Christ, having restored and exalted the orignal dignity of nature, vouchsafed spécial assistance to the will of man ; and by the gifts of his grâce, and the promise of heavenly bliss, He raised it to a nobler state. In

like manner this great gift of nature has ever been, and always will be, constantly cherished by the Catholic Church ; for to her alone has been committed the charge of handing down to ail âges the benefits purchased for ns by Jésus Christ. Yet there are many who imagine that the Church is hostile to human liberty. Haying a false and absurd notion as to what liberty is, either they pervert the Yory idea of liberty, or they extend it at their pleasure to many things in which man cannot rightîy be regard ed as free.

"We hâve on other occasions, and especially in our Encyclical Lelter Immortale Dei, in treating of the so-called modem liberties, distinguished between their good and evii éléments ; and we hâve shown that whatsoever is good therein is as ancient as truth itself, and that the Church has always most wiliingly approved and practised it ; but whatsoever has been added is of a vitiated kind, the fruit of the disorders of the âge and of an insatiate longiug after novelties. Seeing, however, that many cling so obstinately to their own opinion in this matter as to imagine thèse modem liberties, vitiated as they are, to be the greatest glory of our âge, and the very basis of civil life, without which no perfect government could be conceived, We therefore ieel it now our duty, for the sake of the common good, to treat separately of this subject.

It is with moral liberty, whether in individuals or in communities that w^e proceed to deal. But, first of ail, it will be well to speak briefly of natural liberty ; for, though the two kinds are distinct and separate, the natural is the fountain head of liberty of whatsoever kind. The unanimous consent and judgment of men, w^hich is certaintly the voice of nature, recognizes this natural liberty in those only who are endowed with intelligence or reason ; and it is by this that man is rightly regarded as responsible

for his aciioiis. For, while other aniraate créatures follow their sensés, seeking good or avoiding evil only by instinct, man has reason to guide him in ail the acts of his lil'e. Eeason sees the contingency of ail the good things which are upon earth ; and thus, seeing that noue of them are of necessiiy for ns, it leaves the will free to chose what it pleases. But man can judge of this contingency, only because he has a soûl that is simple, spiritual and intellectual ; a soûl, therefore, which is not produced by matter and does not dépend on matter for its existence, but which is created immediately by Grod. and, far surpassing the condition of material things, has a life and action of its own — sothat, knowing the unchangeable and necessary reasons 6f what is true and good, it can judge of the contingency of anything in particular When, therefore, it is established that man's soûl is immortal and rational, the foundation of natural liberty is at once most firmly.laid.

As the Catholic Church déclares in the strongest terms the simplicity, spirituality, and immortality of the soûl, so with unequalled constancy she asserts also its freedom. The&e truths she has always taught and has sustained them as a dogma of faith ; and whenever heretics or innovators hâve attacked the liberty of man, the Church has defended it and protected it from assault. History bears witness to the energy with which she met the fury of the Manicheans and the like ; and the earnestness with which in later years she defended human liberty in the Council of Trent, and against the followers of Jansenius is a well-kown fact. Never and in no place, has she made truce with fatalism. LiberXy then, as we hâve said, belongs only to those who hâve gift of reason or intelligence. Considered as to its nature it is the faculty of choosing means fitted for the end proposed : for he only is master of his actions who can choose one thing ont of many. Now,

since everything chosen as a means is viewed as good or useful, and since good, as such, is the proper object of our désire, it follows that freedom of choice is a property ol the will, or rather is identical with the will in so far as it has in its action the faculty of choice. But the will cannot proceed to aôt until it is enlightened by the knowledge possessed by the intellect. In other words, the good wished by the will is necessarily good in so far as it is known by the intellect ; and the more so, because in ail \'oluntary acts choice is subséquent to a judgment upon the truth of the good presented, declaring to which préférence should be given. No sensible man can doubt that judgment is an act of reason, not of the will. The end, or object, both of the rational will and of its liberty, is the good, which is in conformity with reason. Since, however, both thèse faculties are imperfect, it is possible, as is often seen, that the reason should propose to the will a good that is not true, but apparent, and that the will should choose accordingly. Just as the possibility of error, and actual error, are defecis of the mind and attest its imperfection so the persuit of an apparent good, though a proof of our freedom, just as a disease is a proof of our vitality, implies defect in human liberty. The will also, simpl}^ because of its dependence on the reason, no sooner desires any^thing contrary thereto than it abuses its freedom of choice and corrupts its very essence. Thus it is that the infinitely perfect Grod, although, because of the supremacy of His intellect and of His essential goodness, He is supremely free, nevertheless cannot choose evil ; neither can the angels and saints, who enjoy the Béatifie Yision. St. Augustine and others urged most admirably against the Pelagians, that, if the possibility of défection from good belonged to the essence or perfection of liberty, then G-od, Our Lord Jegus Christ, and the angels and saints, who

hâve not this power, woiild hâve no liberty at ail, or woulcl hâve less liberty than man has in his state of pilgrimage and imperfection. This siibject is often discussed by Angelic Doctor, in his démonstration that the possibility of sinning is not freedom, but slavery. It will sufflce to quote his subtle commentary on the words of Our Lord ; " Whosoever commiteth sin is the slave of sin " (St. John, viii., 34). '' Everything, " he says, " is that which belongs to it naturally. When, therefore, it acts through power outside itself, it does not act of itself but through another, that is, as a slave. But man is by nature rational. When, therefore, he acts according to reason, he act of himself and according to his free v^ill and this is liberty. Whereas, w^hen he sins, he acts in opposition to reason, and is moved by another, and so is bound by another's chain. Therefore : " Whosoever committeth sin is the slave of sin." Even the heathen philosophers clearly recognized this truth, especially those v^^ho held that the wise man alone is free ; and by the term " wise man " they meant, as is well known, the man trained to live in accordance with his nature — that is, in justice and virtue.

Such then, being the condition of human liberty, it necessarily stands in need' of light and strength to direct its actions to good and to restrain them from evil. "Without this the freedom of our vs^ill would be our ruin. First of ail there must be law — that is a fixed rule of teaching what is to be done and what is to be left undone. This rule cannot afFect animais in any true sensé, since they act of necessity, foUowing their natural instinct and cannot of themselves act in any other way. On the other hand, as w^as said above, he w^ho is free can either act or not act, can do this or do that, as he pleases, because his judgment précèdes his choice,

And his judment not only décides on good or evil in the abstract, but also on what is practically good and therefore to be chosen, and what is practically evil and therefore to be avoided, so that he may attain his last end, to which ail his actions must be directed as means. This ordination of reason is called law. In man's free will, moreover, or in the moral necessity of our voluntary acts being in accordance with reason, lies the very loot of the necessity of law. Nothing more foolish can be uttered or conceived than the notion that, because man is free by nature, he is therefore exempt from law. Were this the case, it would follow that, to become free we must become irrational. Whereas the truth is that we must submit to law precisely because we are naturally iree. Law is the guide of man's actions ; it turns towards good by its rewards, and deters him from evil by its punishments. Foremost in this office comes the natural law, which is written and engraved in the mind of every man; and this is nothing but our reason, commanding us to do good and forbidding evil. Nevertheless, thèse prescriptions of human reasons hâve the force of law, only because they are the voice and the interpreters of some higher power on which our reason and liberty necessarily dépend. For, since the force of law consists in the imposing of obligations and the granting of rights, authority is its one and only foundation — the power, that is, of imposing the former and protecting the latter, and of assigning to both the necessary sanctions of rewarded and chastisement. But ail this clearly, cannot be found in man, if, as his own suprême legislator, he is to dertermine his own actions. It follows, therefore, that the law of nature is identical with the eternal law, implanted in rational créatures, and inclining them to their right action and end ; and it is identical also with ttie eternal reason of Grod, the Creator, and

Ruler of the world. To this rule of action and restraint of evil, Grod lias vouchsafed to give spécial aids for strengtheniug and ordering the hviman will. The first and most excellent of thèse is His divine grâce, whereby the mind is onlightened and the will wholesomely invigorated and set in constant pursuit of moral good, so that the use of liberty becomes at once less difficult and less dangerons. Not that the Divine assistance hinders in any way the freedom of our v^ull ; for grâce is intrinsic in man and in harmony v^ith his natural inclinations, since it flow^s from the very Creator of his mind and will, by Whom ail things are ordered in conformity with their nature. As the Angelic Doctor points out, it is because divine grâce cornes from the author of nature, that it is so admirably adapted to be the safeguard of every nature, and to maintain the character, efficiency and opérations of each.

What has been said of the liberty of individuals, is no less applicable to them when considered as constituting civil society. For what reason and the natural law do for individuals that human law, promulgated for their good, does for society. Of the laws enacted by men, some are concerned with what is good or bad by its very nature ; and the one they command men to follow but the other to avoid, adding at the same time a suitable sanction. But such laws by no means dérive their origin from civil society ; because , just as civil society did not create human nature, so neither caii it be said to be the author of the good which befits human nature, or of the evil which is contrary to it ; rather they come before ail human society, and are the outcomç of the natural and, consequently, of the eternal law. The precepts, therefore, of the natural law, incorporated in the laws of men, hâve not merely the force of human law, but they possess that higher and more august sanction which belongs to the law

of nature and the eternal law. And within the sphère of this kind of la^A's, the duty of the civil legislator is mainl}^ this : To make the community obedient, by the adoption of a commoa discipline, and by putting restraint upon the refractory and viciously inclined, sothat, deterred from evil, they may turn to what is good, or, at any rate, may avoid causing trouble and disturbance to the State. But there are othei enactments of the civil authority, which follow indirectly from thê naturai law, and décide cases of which the law of nature treats only in a gênerai way. For instance, though nature commands ail tocontribute to the public peace and prosperity, the manner, and circumstances and conditions under which such service is to be rendered are determined by the wisdom of men. It is in the constitution of thèse particular rules of life, suggested by reason and prudence, and put forth by compétent authority, that human law properly so called consists, bindiiig ail citizens to work together for the atlainment of the common end proposed to the community, and forbidding them to départ from it ; and, in so far as it is in conformity with the dictâtes of nature, leading to w^hat is good, and deterring Irom evil. From this it appears that the eternal law of God is alone the standard and rule of human liberty, and that, not only of individuals, but also of the community and civil society which they constitute. Therefore, the true liberty of human society does not consist in every man's doing what he pleases, for this would simply end in turmoil and confusion and the overthrow of the State ; but rather in this, that through the directions of the civil law he may more easily conform to the prescriptions of the eternal law. Likewise the liberty of those who are in authority does not consist in the power to lay unreasonable and capricious commands upon their subjects, which would moreover be criminal and

would lead to the ruin of the commonwealth ; but the binding force of human laws is in this, tliat they are to be regarded as applications of the eternal law, and incapable of sanctioning- anythin<T which is not contained in that law, as in the principle of ail law. Thus, St. Angustine most wisely says : " I think that you can see at the same time that there is nothingjustand lawful in that temporal law, unless what men hâve gathered from the eternal law." If, then, by any pow^er, there be sancîioned anything ont of conformity with the principles of right reason, and w^hich is consequently hurtful to the commonwealth, such an enactment can hâve no authority, as not being even a law of justice, but likely to lead men away from that good which is the only end of civil Society.

Therefore, the nature of human liberty, however it be considered, whether in inôividuals, or in society, whether in those who command or in those who obey, supposes the necessity of obédience to some suprême and eternal law^ w^hich is no other than the authority of Grod, commanding good and forbidding evil. And, so far from this most équitable authority of G-od over men diminishing or destroying thair liberty, it protects it and perfects it ; for the prosecution and attainment of their respective ends are the real perfection of ail créatures ; and the suprême end to which human liberty can aspire is aod.

Thèse precepts of the truest and highest teaching known to us by the very light of reason, the Church, instructed by the example and doctrine of her Divine Author, has ever propagated and asserted, ; for she has ever made them the mcasure of her office and of her teaching to the Christian nations. As to morals, the laws of the Grospel not only far surpass the wisdom of the heathen, but are an invitation and an introduction to a state of holiness unknown to

the ancients ; and briiiging man nearer to Grod, they make him at once the possessor of a more perfect liberty Thus the powerful influence of the Church has ever been manifested in the custody and protection of the civil and political liberty of the people. The enumeration of its merits in this respect does not belong to our purpose. It is sufficient to recall the fact that slavery, that old reproach of the heathen nations, was mainly abolished by the bénéficiai efforts of the Church. The impartiality oflawandthe true brotherhood ofman were first asserted by Jésus Christ ; and His Apostles reechoed His voice, when they declared that there was neither Jew, nor Q-entiie, nor barbarian, nor Scythian, but ail were brothers in Christ. So powerfuU, so conspicuous in this respect is the influence of the Church, that expérience abundantly testihes that Savage customs are no longer possible in any land where she has once set her foot ; but that gentleness speedily takes the place of cruelty, and ihe light of truth quickly dispels the darkeness of barbarism. Nor has the Church been less lavish in the benefits she has conferred on civilized nations in every âge, either by resisting the tyranny of the wicked, or by protecti ng the innocent and helpless from injury ; or finally by using her influence in the support of any form of government which commend itself to the citizens at home because of its justice, or was feared by enemies without because of its power. Moreover the highest duty is to respect authority and obediently to submit to just law ; and by this the members of a community are effectually protected from the wrong-doing of evil men. Lawful power is frora God, " and whosoever resisteth authority resisteth the ordinance of Grod :" wherefore, obédience is greatly ennobled, when subjected to an authority which is most just and suprême. But where the power to command is wanting, or where a law

is eiiacted contrary to reasoii, or to the eternal law or the ordinance of God, obédience is unlawful, lest, while obeying man, we fail in obédience to Grod. Thus, by an^ effectuai barrier being opposed to tyranny, the authority in the State will not haye ail its own way ; but the interest and rights of ail will be safe-guarded — the risfhts of individuals of domestic Society, and of ail the members of the commonwealth ; so that ail may be free to live according to law and right reason, in which, as we hâve shown, true liberty really consists.

If, when men discuss the question of liberty, they only grasped its true meaning, Euch as we hâve now drawn it out, they would never venture to affix such a caiumny on the Church as to assert that she is the loe to individual and public liberty. But there are many who follow in the footsteps of Lucifer, and adopt as their own his rebellious cry, " I will not serve " ; and consequently substitute for true liberty what is sheer license. Such, for instance, are the men, belonging to that widel^^-spread and powerful organization who, usurping the name of liberty, style themselves Libérais.

What Eationalists aim at in philosophy, that the supporters of Liberalism are attempting in the domain of morality and politics. The chief doctrine of rationalism is the supremacy of the human reason, which refusing due submission to the Di^âne and eternal reason, proclaims its own independence, and constitutes itself the suprême principle, and source, and iud<?e of truth. So thèse foUowers of Liberalism deny the existence of any Divine authority to which obédience is due, and proclaim that every man makes his own law ; whence arises that ethical System which they style independent morality, and which under the guise of Liberty, exonérâtes man from any obédience to the commands of Grod, and substitutes a boundless license. The end of ail this D

it is not difficult to foresee. For, once granted that man is firmly persuaded of his own supremacy, it follows that the efficient cause of the unity of civil Society is to be sought, not in any principle exterior or superior to man, but simply in the free will of individuals ; that the power of the State is from the people only ; and that, just as very man's individual reason is his only rule of life, so the collective reason of the community should be the suprême guide in the management of ail public atFairs. Hence the doctrine of the supremacy of the majority, and that the majority is the source of ail law and authority. But, from vi^hat has been said, it is clear that ail this is in contradiction to reason. To dissolve the bond of union betv^een man and civil society, on the one hand, and Grod, the Creator, and consequently the Suprême Legislator, on Ihe other, is plainly répugnant to the nature, not only of man, but of ail created thing ; for, of necessity, ail efFects must in some v^ay be connected with their cause ; and it belongs to the perfection of every nature to contain itself within that sphère which the rational order has assignedto.it; namely, that the inferior 'should be subject and obedient to the superior. But, besides this, a doctrine of this charactor is most hurtful both to individuals and to the State. For, once ascribe to humain reason the only authori+y to décide what is true and vv^hat is good and the real distinction between good and evil is destroyed ; honor and dishonor become a matter of private opinion : pleasure is the measure of what is law^ful ; and, given a code of morality which can hâve a little or no power to restrain the unruly propensities of man, a way is then opened to universal corruption. To turn to public afFairs : authority is sevcred from the true and natural principle whence it dérives ail its efficacy for tne common good ; and the law determining right and wrong is at the mercy of a majority —

which is simply a downward path to tyranny. The ompire of God over maii and civil society once repudiated, it follows that religion, as a public institution ceases to exi:;t, and with it everything that belongs • to religion. Likewise with ambitions designs on sovereignty, tumult and sédition will be common amongst the people ; and when duty and conscience cease to appeal to them, there will be nothing to hold them back but force, which is an inefficient restraint upon their covetousness. Of this we hâve almost daily évidence in the conflict with Socialists and other séditions societies, whose one object is révolution. It is for those, theri, w^ho are capable of forming a just estimate of things, to décide w^hether such doctrines promote that tïne liberty which alone is worthy of man, or rather pervert and destroy it.

There are, indeed, some adhérents of liberalism V^^ho do not subscribe to thèse opinions, which we hâve seen to be so fearful in their enormity, and tending to produce the most terrible evils. Indeed many compelled by the force of truth, do not hesitate to admit that such a liberty is vicions and simple licence, w^hen it is intemperate in its claims, to the neglect of truth and justice; and therefore they would hâve liberty ruled and directed by right reason, and consequently subject to the natural law and to the divine eternal law. And hère they think they may stop, and hold that no man is bound by any law of Grod, except such as can be known by natural reason. In this they are plainly inconsistent ; for if, as they must admit, and as no one can rightly deny, the will of the Divine Legislator is to be, obeyed, because every man is under the pow^er of Grod and tends towards Him as his end, it follows that no one can assign limits to His législative authority without failing in the obédience which is due. Indeed, if the human mind be so presump.

tuous as to defiiie what are Grod's rights and ils own duties, its révérence for the Divine law will be apparent rtther than real, and its own judgement will prevail over the authority and providence of Grod. Man must therefore take his rule of life from the eternal law ; and from every one of those laws which Grod, in His infinité wisdom and pow^er, has been pleased to enact, and to make known to ufe in a manner so sure as to leave no room for doubt. And the more so, because laws ot this kind hâve the same Origin and Author as the eternal law, and are absolutely in accordance with right reason and perfect the natural law ; and they constitute the goverament of Grod, who graciously guides and directs both the intellect and the will of man lest they fall into error. Let then a holy and inviolable union prevail where disunion is neither seemly nor possible ; and in ail things according to the dictâtes of right reason, let G-od be dutifully and obediently served.

There are others, somewhat more moderate though not more consistent, who affirm that the morality of individuals is to be guide by the Divine law, but not the morality of the State, so that in public affairs the commends of Grod may be passed over, and may be disregarded in the framing of laws. Hence follows that fatal theory of the séparation of Church and State. But the absurdity of such a position is manifest. Nature herself proclaims the necessity of providing in the State the means and opportunities whereby the community may be enabled to live, as it shoTuld, according to the laws of Grod ; for He is the source of ail goodness and justice, and it is absolutely répugnant to maintain that such laws can be totally disregarded or rendered abortive by contrary enactments. Besides those who are in authority owe it to the common wealth not only to provide for the external w^ell-being and administration of the

State, but still more to consult for tlic w clfare of men's soûls by the wisdom of their législation. But for the increase of such benefits, nothing more suitable can be conceived than the laws which hâve God lor their Author ; and, therefore, they who in their government take no account of thèse laws abuse political power by causing it to deviate from its proper end and from what nature prescribes. And, what is of more importance, and what we hâve more than once pointed ont, although the civil authority has not the same approximate end as the spiritual, nor proceeds on the same lines, nevertheless in the exercise of their separate powers they must occasionally meet — for their subjects are the same ; and not unfrequently they deal with the same objects, though in différent ways. Whenever this occurs, since a state of conflict is absurd and manifestly répugnant to the most wise ordinance of God, there must necessary exist some order or mode of procédure to remove the occasions of différence and contention, and to secure harmony in ail things. This harmony has been not inaptly compared to that which exists between the body and the soûl, for the well-being oi both ; the séparation of w^hich brings harm chiefly to the body, since it extinguishes its very life.

To make this more évident, the growth of liberty ascribed to our âge must be considered in its vanous détails. And, first, let us examine that liberty in individuals which is so opposed to the virtue of religion, namely, the liberty of worship, as it is called, which rests on this principle, that every man is free to profess as he choses any religion or none. But, assuredly, of ail the duties which man has to fulfil, that without doubt is the chief and holiest whereby he is bid to worship God with dévotion and piety ; which lollows of necessity from the truth, that we ?ire e ver in the power of God, and are ever guided

by his will and providence, and, having corne forth from Hira, must return to Him. Add to this, that no true virtue can exist without religion ; for moral rirtue is concerned with those things which lead to Grod as man's suprême and ultimate good ; and therefore religion, which (as St. Thomas says) " performs those actions which are directly and immediately ordered to the divine honor," rules and governs ail virtues. And, if it is asked, which of the many confiicting religions it is necessary to embrace, reason and the natural law unhesitatingly answer: that one which Grod commands and which men can without difficulty recognize for themselres by certain exterior signs w^hereby Divine Providence has ordered that it should be distinguished, because, in a matter of such moment, the most terrible loss would be the conséquence of any error. Wherefore, with a freedom such as we hâve described, to man is given the power to pervert or abandon with impunity the most sacred of duties, and to exchange the unchangeable good for evil ; which, as we hâve said, is no liberty, but the dégradation of liberty, and the abject subjection of the soûl to sin.

The same liberty, if it be considered in relation to the state, clearly implies that there is no reason w^hy the State should ofFer any bornage to G-od, or should désire any public récognition of Him ; that no form of worship is to be preierred to another, but that ail stand on an equal footing ; no account being taken of the religion of the people, even if they profess the Catholic laith. But, to justify this, it must needs be true that the State has no duties towards G-od, or that such duties, if they exist, may be abandoned with impunity ; both of which assertions ire manifestly false. For it cannot be doubted that, by the will of God, men are united in civil socièty ; whether its éléments be considered ; or its form, which is authority ; or the object of its existence ;

or the abundance of the services which it renders to mail. Grod it is Who has made man for society, and bas placed bim in tbe company of otbers like bimself, so tbat wbat was wantinf? to bis nature, and beyond bis attainment if left to bis own resources, he migbt obtain by association witb otbers. Wberefore civil society must acknow^ledge G-od as its founder and parent, and must believe and v\'orsbip His pov^er and autbority. Justice tberefore forbids, and leason forbids, tbe State to be godless; or to adopt a line of action wbicb vv'ould end in godliness — namely, to treat tbe varions religions, as tbey call tbem, alike, and to bestow upon tbem promiscuously equal rigbts and privilèges Since, tben, tbe profession of one religion is necessary in tbe State, tbat one must be professed wbicb alone is true, and v/bicb can be recognized witbout difficulty, especially in Catbolic States, because tbe marks of trutb are, as it v^ere, engraven upon it. Tbis religion, tberefore, tbe rulers of tbe State must préserve and protect, if tbey would provide, as tbey sbould do, witb prudence and usefulness for tbe good of tbe community. For tbe public pow^er exists for the weltare of tbose wbom it governs ; and altbougb its proximate end is to lead men to tbe prosperity wbicb is found in tbis life, yet, in so doing, it ougbt not to diminisb, but ratber to increase, man's capability of attaining to tbe suprême good in wbicb bis everlasting bappiness consists, wbicb ne ver can be attained except tbrougb religion.

But tbis we bave explained more fully elsewbere. We now only wisb to observe tbat liberty of sucb a kind is greatly burtful to tbe true liberty botb of rulers and of tbeir subjects. Religion, moreover, is of wonderful advantai^e. For derivin^ tbe first origin of power direct ly from Grod Himself, wâtb grave autbority it commands rulers to be mindful of tbeir duty, to govern witbout injustice or se verity,

and to rule their people kindly and with an almost paternal charity ; it admonishes subjects to be obedient to lawful anthority, as to the ministers of Grod ; and it binds them to their rulers, not merely by obédience, but by révérence and affection, forbidding ail séditions and attempts that would disturb public order and tranquility, and cause greater restrictions to be put upon the liberty of the people. We need not mention how greatly religion conduces to pure morals, and pure morals to liberty ; for reason shews, and history confirms the fact, that the better the morality of States, the greater liberty, and wealth, and power do they enjoy.

We must now consider a little the liberty of speech, and the liberty of the press. It is hardly necessery to say that there can be no such right as this, if it is not used in modération, and if it passes beyond the bounds and end of ail true liberty. For right is a moral power which, as we hâve said and must again repeat, it is absurd to suppose that nature has given indifferently to truth and falsehood, to justice and to injustice. Men hâve a right freely and prudently to propogate throughout the State whatsoever things are true and honorable, so that as many as possible may possess them ; but false doctrines, than w^hich no mental plague is greater, and vices which corrupt the heart, should be diligently repressed by public authority, lest they insidiously work the ruin of the State. The excesses of an unbridled intellect, which really end in the oppression of the ignorant multitude, are not less rightly restrained by the authority of the law^ than are the injuries inflicted by force upon the weak , and even more so, because by far the greater part of the community either absoiutely cannot, or can only wnth great difïîculty, avoid their illusions and subtleties, especially such as flatter their own passions. If unbrjdled license of speech and of writing be granted

to ail, nothing will remain sacred and inviolate; even the highest and truest judgments of nature, the common and noblest héritage ol the human race, will not be spared. Thus, truth being obscured by darkness, periiicious and manifold error, as often happens, will easily prevail ; and license will gain what liberty looses ; for liberty will be more free and secure, in proportion as license is more restrained. In regard, however, to such matters of opinion as Grod leaves to man's free discussion, full liberty of thought and of speech is naturally whithin the right of everyone ; for this liberty never leads men to suppress the truth, but leads often to its discovery and manifestations.

A like judgment must be passed upon what is called liberty of teaching. There can be no doubt that truth alone should imbue the minds of men ; for m truth are found the well-being, and end, and perfection of intelligent nature ; and therefore truth alone should be taught both to the ignorant and to the edvicated, so as to bring knowledge to the former and to préserve it in the latter. For this reason it is plainly, the duty of those who teach to banish error from the mind, and by sure safeguards to exclude ail false opinions. From this it folio ws, that greatly opposed to reason, and tending absolutely to pervert men's minds, is that liberty oi which we speak, in so far as it claims for itself the right of teaching what it pleases — a liberty which cannot be granted by the State without failing in its duty. And the more so, because the authority of the teacher has great weight with his hearers, who can rarely décide for themselves as to the truth or falsehood of the instruction given to them.

Wherefore, this liberty also that it may bejust, must be kept within certain limits, lest the art of teaching be turned with impunity into an instrument of corruption. Now truth, which should be

the sole object of those who teach, is of two kinds, imtural and supernatural. Of natural truths, such as the principles of nature and what is deduced from them immediately by reason, there is a kind of common patrimony in the human race. On this, as on a firm basis, morality, and justice, and religion, and the very bonds of human society rest ; and to allow it to be with impunity violated or destroyed would be impious and foolish, and inhuman. But with no less religions care must we préserve that great and sacred treasure of the truths which Grod has taught us. By many convincing arguments which the defenders of Ghristianitv hâve often used, certain leading truths hâve been laid down : namely that some thmgs hâve been revealed by Grod ; that the only begotten Son of God was made Flesh, to bear witness to the truth ; that a perfect society was founded by Him, that is, the Church of which He is the Head, and with which He has promised to abide till the end of the world. To this society He entrusted ail the truths which He had taught, that it might keep and guard them and with lawful authority explain them ; and at the same time He commanded ail nations to hear the Yoice of the Church as if it were His own, threatening those who would not with everlasting perdition. Thus it is manifest that man's best and surest teacher is G-od, the source and principle of ail truth. and the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, the way. the truth, and the life, the true light which enlightens every man, and to whose teaching ail must submit : " And they shall ail be taught of God " (St. John, vi. 45). In faith and in the teaching of morality God made the Church a partaker of His divine authority, and throuG^h His divine heloh she cannot be deceived. She is, therefore, the greatest and most safe teacher of mankind, with inviolable right to teach them,

Sustained by the truth received from her Divine Fouiider, the Church lias ever sought, above ail thingfe, to fulfil tho mission entrusted to her by G-od ; undeterred by the difficulties surrounding her, she has never ceased to assert her liberty of teaching ; and in this way, tho superstition of paganism being dispelled, the world was renewed unto Christian wisdom. Now, reason itself teaches that the truths of révélation and those of nature cannot really be opposed to one another, and that whatever is at variance with Ihemmust necessarily befalse. Therefore the divine teaching of the Church, so far from being an obstacle to the pursuit of learning and the progress of science, or from retarding in any way the advance of civilization, in reality brings to them the guidance of a shining light. And for the same reason it is of great advantage for the perfecting of human liberty, since Our Saviour Jésus Christ has said that by truth is man made free : " You shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free." (St. John viii. 32.) Therefore there is no reason why genuine liberty should be displeased, or true science feel aggrieved, in haviiig to bear that just and necessary restraint by v^hich, in the judgment ofthe Church and of reason itself, mau's teaching has to be controlled. The Church, as facts hâve everywhere proved, while she chiefiy and above ail looks to the defence of the Christian faith, is at the same time and careful to foster and promote every kind of human learning. Learning is in itself good, and praise-worthy, and désirable ; and ail érudition which is the fruit of sound reason, and in conformity v^ith the truth of things, serves not a little to illustrate what Grod has taught us. The Church, indeed, to our great benefit, has carefully preserved tho monuments of ancient wisdom ; has opened everywhere homes of science ; end has urged on intellectual progress, by fostering most diligently

the arts by which the civilization of our âge is so much adorned. Lastly, we must not forget that a vast field lies freely open to man's iiidustry and genius, containing ail those things which hâve no necessary connection with Christian faith and morals, or as to which the Church using no authority leaves the judgment of the learned iree and unrestrained. From ail this may be understood the nature and character of that liberty w^hich the foUowers oi liberalism so eagerly demand and proclaira. On the one hand, they demand for themselves and for the State a licence which opens the way to every perversity of opinion, and on the other, they hamper the Church in many ways, restricting her liberty within the narrowest limits, although from her teaching there is nothing to be feared, but very much to be gained. An other liberty is greatly proclaimed, namely liberty of conscience. If by this is meant that every one may, as he chooses, worship Grod or not, it is sufficiently refuted by what has been already said. But it may also be taken to mean that every man in the State may, from a consciousness of duty, and without obstacle, foUow^ the will of Grod and obey fïis commands. This indeed is true liberty worthy of the sons of Grod, which nobly sustains the dignitj'- of man, and is stronger than ail violence or wrong, — a liberty which the Church has always desired and held most dear. This is a liberty which the Apostles claimed for themselves with intrepid constancy, w^hich the defenders of Christianity confirmed by their writing, and which the Marthyrs in vast numbers consecrated by their blood. And rightly so, for this Christian liberty bears witness to the absolute and most just dorninion of Grod over man, and to the great and suprême duty of man towards God. Tt has nothing in common with a séditions and rebellious mind ; and it in no way derogates from obe-

dience to public authority ; for the right to command and to require obédience exists oiily so far as it is in accordance with the authority of Grod, and is within the measure that He has laid down. When anything is commanded which is plainly at variance with the will of Grod, there is a departure from this divinely constituted order, and a conflict with the Divine authority ; and then it is right not to obey.

By the patrons of liberalism who make the State absolute and omnipotent, and proclaim that man should live altogether independently of Grod, this liberty of which we speak, and which is joined to virtue and religion, is not acknowledged ; and whatever is done for its préservation is held to be an injury and an ofFence against the State. Indeed, if they spoke truly, there would be no tyranny, no matter how cruel, which we should not be bound to endure and to obey.

The Church would most earnestly désire that this Christian teaching, of which we hâve given the heads, should in reality and in practice penetrate every rank of society. This teaching would be of the greatest efficacy to heal the evils of our day, which are neither few nor light, and are the ofFspring in great part of the false liberty which is so much extolled, and in which the germ of salvation and glory w^as supposed'to be con^ained. This hope has been disappointed by the resuit ; the fruit, instead of being sweet and wholesome, is tainted and bitter. If a remedy is desired, let it be sought for in a restoration of sound doctrine, from w^hich alone the préservation of order and the defence of true liberty can be eipected. Yet, w^ith the discernment of a true mother, the Church w^eighs the great burden of human weakness ; and she knows w^hat is the course in which the minds and the affairs of men are now borne along. For this reason, while not conceding any rights to anything that is not true

and honest, it does not forbid public authority to tolerate what is at variance with truth and justice, for the sake of avoidino^ a greater evil, or of obtaining or preserving some greater good. Grod Himself, in His providence though he is of infinité goodness and power, allows evil to exist in the v^orld, partly that greater good may not be impeded and partly that greater evil may not follov^^ In the government of States it is wel] to imitate the Ruler of the v\^orld ; and, as the authority of man is powerless to prevent every evil, it has (as St. Augustine says) " to overlook, and to leave unpunished, many things which are punished, and rightly, by Divine Providence." But in such circumstances, if, for sake of the common good (which is the only just reason), the lav^^ of man may and ought to tolerate evil, it may not and ought not to approve or désire evil for its own sake ; for evil of itself, being a privation of good, is opposed to the common w^elfare which a legisJator must désire and défend to the best of his power. In this, human law must endeavor to imitate Grod, Who, as St. Thomas says, in allowing evil to exist in the world, " neither wishes evil to be done, nor wishes it not to be done, but wishes only to permit it to be done ; and this is good." This sentence of the Angelic Doctor contains briefly the whole doctrine as to the permission of evil. But, to judge rightly, we must acknowledge that the more a State has to tolerate evil, the further is it from perfection ; and that the tolérance of evil, which is suggested by political prudence, must be circumscribed by the limits which its cause, the public welfare, requires. Wherefore, if such tolérance w^ould be injurions to the public welfare, and bring greater evils on the State, it would not be lawful ; for in such a case the motive of good is wanting. And although in the extraordinary condition of thèse times, the Ohurch usually acquiesces in certain

modem liberties, not because she prefers them in themselves, but because she judges it expédient to permit them, in better times she would use her own îiberiy ; and, by persuasion, exhortation, and entreaty, she would endeavor, as she ought, to fuitil the duty assigned to her by Grod of providing for the eternal salvation of mankind. One thing, however, remains always true — that the liberty which is claimed for ail, to do ail things, is not, as we hâve often said, ofitself désirable, inasmuch as it is contrary to reason that error and truth should hâve equal rights. And as to tolérance, it is surprising how^ far removed from the justice and prudence of the Church are they v^^ho profess v^^hat is called liberalism. For, in allowing that boundless license of which we hâve spoken, they exceed ail limits, and end at last by making no apparent distinction between truth and error, honesty and dishonesty. And because the Church, the pillar and ground of truth, and the unerring teacher of morals, is forced utterly to reprobate and condemn tolérance of such and abandoned and criminal character, they calumniate her as wanting in patience and gentleness, and thus fail to see that, in so doing, they impute to her as a fault what is in reality a matter for commendation. But, in spite of ail this show of tolérance, it very often happens that, while they profess themselves ready to shower liberty on ail in the greatest profusion, they are utterly intolérant towards the Catholic Church, by refusing to grant it the liberty which is its right.

To reduce briefly, for clearness sake, to its principal heads, ail that has been hère written, and that lollow^s from it, the summary is this : That, by a necessity of his nature, man is w^holly subject to the true and everlasting power of G-od ; and that man has no liberty except that which must be in submission to Grod and in subjection to His will. To deny

the existence of this anthority in G-od, or to refuse to submit to it, is to act. not as a free man, but as one who treasonably abuses his liberty ; and in such a disposition of mind the chief vice of liberalism consists. The form. however, of this vice is manifold ; for in more y^ays and degrees than one can the will départ from the obédience which is due to Grod or to those who share the divine power.

To reject the suprême authority of Grod and to cast ofFall obédience to Him in public matters, and even in those which are private and domestic, is the greatest perversion of liberty and the worst kind of liberalism : and against this, what we hâve said applies in its fullest sensé.

Next comes the System of those who admit indeed the duty of submitting to Grod,'the Creator and Euler of the world, inasmuch as ail nature is dépendent on His will, but who boldly reject the laws of faith and morals, which are above the natural order, and are revealed by the authority of G-od ; or who at least assert that there is no reason why regard should be paid to thèse laws, at least in public by the State. How wrong such men also are, and how inconsistent, we hâve seen above. From this doctrine, as its source and principle, flows that fatal maxim of the séparation of Church and State; whereas, on the contrary, it is clear that the two powers,, though dissimiiar in functions and uneqnal in decree, ought nevertheless to live in concord, by the harmony of their actions and the fulfilment ot their respective duties.

But this maxim is understood in two ways, Many wish the State to be separated from the Church .

wholly and entirely, so that in every right of human H

Society, in institutions, customs and laws, in the ■

oliices of State, and in the éducation of youth, they would pay no more regard to the Church than if it did not exist ; and, at most, would allow the citiz(îns

indivi îually to attend to their relio:ioii in private if they pleased. Against thèse, ail the arguments bjr which we disproved the doctrine of the séparation of Church and State are conclusisre ; and with this additional argument, that it is absurd that the citizen shoald respect the Church, but tiie State despise it.

Others do not oppose the existence of the Church, nor indeed couid they; yet they rob her of the nature and rights of a perfect society, and maintain. that it does not belong to her to legislate, to judge, or to punish, but only to exhort, to ad vise, and to rule her subjects according to their own consent and will. By their opinion they would pervert the nature of this divine society, and attenuate and narrow its authority, its office of teacher, and its whole efficiency ; and at the same time they would aggrandize the power of civil government to such an extent as to subject the Church of Grod to the empire a4id sway of the State, like any voluntary association of citizens, To completely réfute such teaching, the arguments often used by the défendants of Christianity, and set forth by Us, especially in the Encyclical Letter Immortale Dei, are of great avail ; for by those arguments it is.proved ihat, by a divine provision, ail the rights which essentially belong to a society that is legitimate, suprême, and perfect in ail its parts, exist in the Church.

There remain those, who while they do not approve the séparation of Church and State, think nevertheless that the Church ought to adapt herselt to the times, and to conform to what is desired by the modem System of government. Such an opinion is Sound, if it is to be understood of an adaptation that is consistent with truth and justice ; in so far, namely, that the Church, in the hope of some great good, may show herself indulgent, and may conform to the times in whatever her sacred office permits. But it is not so in regard to practices and doctrines E

which a perversion of morals and a false jiidgment hâve unlaw^fully introduced. Eeligion, truth, and justice, must ever be maintained ; and, as Grod has entrusted thèse great and sacred things to the care of the Church, she can never be so unfaithful to her office as to dissemble in what is false or unjust, or to connive at vç^hat is hurtful to religion.

From what has been said, it followsthat it is in no way lawful to demand, to défend, or to grant unconditional freedom of thought, of speech, of w^riting, or of religion, as if they w^ere so many rights which nature has given to raan. For if nature had really given them, it would be lawful to refuse obédience to Grod, and there would be no restraint to human liberty. It likewise folio ws, that freedom in thèse things may be tolerated when there is just cause ; but only with such modération as will prevent its degenerating into licence and excess. And where thèse liberties are in use, men should use them in doing good, and no further.

Whenever there exisis or there is reason to fear, either an unjust oppression of the people, or a deprivation of the Church's liberty, it is lawful to seek for such a change of government as will give due liberty of action. In such a case it is not an excessive and vicions liberty that is sought for , but only some relief, for the common welfare, in order that amidst the licence for evil the pow^er of doing good may not be hindered.

Again, itis not of itself wrong to prefer a démocratie form of government, if only the Catholic doctrine be maintained as to the origin and use of power. Of the varions forms of government, the Church does not reject any that are fitted for the welfare of the subject ; she wishes only — and this nature itself requires — that they should be constituted without wrong to any one, and especially without violating the rights of the Church.

Unless through some exceptionable condition of things it be otherwise determined, it is well to take part in the administration of public affairs. And the Church approves of evory one giving his services for the common good, and doing ail that lie can for the defence, and préservation, and prosperity of his country.

Neither does the Church condemn those who, if it can be done without violation of justice, wish to make their country independent of any foreign or despotic pov^^er. Nor does she blâme those v^^ho v^ish to give to the State the power of self-government, and to its citizens the greatest possible measure of prosperity. So long as it is without license, the Church has always fosteted civil liberty, and this was seen especially in Italy in the municipal prosperity, and wealth, and glory, w^hich vrere obtained at a time w^hen the salutary power of the Church had, without opposition, spread to ail parts of the State,

Thèse things, vénérable brethren, which, under the guidance of faith and reason, we hâve, in the discharge of our apostolic office, now delivered to you, will, w^e hope, especially by your co-operation with us, be useful unto many. In low^liness of heart we raise our eyes in supplication to Grod, and earnestly beseech Him to shed raercifully the light of His wisdom and of his counsel upon men, so that, strengthened by thèse heavenly gifts, they may in things of such moment discern w^hat is true, and may then in public and in private, at ail times and w^ith unshaken constancy, live in accordance wàth the truth that they hâve known. As a pledge.of thèse heavenly gifts, and in witness of our good will to you, vénérable brethren, and to the clergy and people committed to each of you, we most lovingly grant in the Lord the Apostolic Bénédiction.

G-iven in Eome, at St. Peter's, on the 20th day of June, in the year MDCCCLXXXVIII, the eleventh year of our Pontifîcate.

POPE LEO XIII

4ièrae Série— No. 28.

CIRCULAIRE AU CLERGE

Archevêché d'Ottawa, le 24 septembre 1888.